Definitely if seating position is a concern sit on (or ride) all the potential maxi-scooters you can. My Piaggio has a wide range of foot positions. Feet forward, which, like many have posted, I really don't care for, to flat and even somewhat semi-rearset, sort of like a SV650, not ideal for touring but better than feat forward, especially when you are riding "spiritied" in the curves/hills. Its nice to actually have, at least on the Piaggio's (250's 350 and maybe the 500's) the ability to readily move your foot/leg position.

This won't be too helpful, but I bought a Honda PCX 125 this spring and haven't ridden my KLR since. (I only rode the Valkyrie three times.) But I was laid up the entire summer after emergency eye surgery. So I spent the riding season riding a rocking chair in front of my computer If at all possible, I'd keep the KLR for winter and ride the Burgman all summer. Otherwise go with the Burgman. The auto transmission spoils you fast.

#1 - I don't really want a $3,000 scooter. I buy new, because I like to know everything that's been done to something and although the KLR isn't a good example, when I buy new, I keep that new thing for years to get my money's worth.
#2 - I won't think twice about $150 a month. The Mrs pressuring me to get that $3000 back in savings....uh I notice that.
#3 - I basically Dave Ramsey everything. I don't have a car payment, credit card debt, blah blah blah. So no way do I owe 60 months, I'd never finance anything that long, but at 3% interest I'll finace a couple grand here and there.

Cool to know you have all those choices and still pick the Burgman.

I stepped up to the Burgman when Suzuki offered 0% for 60 months financing.
As far as comfort, I bought a part off eBay that raised the stock butt pad 4" and it keeps the adjustment. The seller is called 2brothersperfromacejr. They make it and it is an easy install. By keeping the curved support, it hits me just under the rib cage and is very comfortable.

I've owned a KLR and a 400 Burgman. They were pretty close on the highway speed wise, the Burgman having much better wind protection. Neither is that good at high speeds, I always felt like I needed more power till I got a VStrom. Burgman was great for riding to work but not very good on twisty back roads, did not have much suspension travel, not much grunt ou of the corners. Did not feel very fast with the CVT but did ok.

My brother has a KLR 650 and I rode with him a few times while I had the Burgman 400. One ride with both him and my other brother on his BMW 1200R they put me in the lead because I had the "little" bike. After awhile I had to drop my speed because the cross winds were affecting the one on the KLR much worse than either me or the one on the BMW. Later my brother on the BMW asked me why I slowed down and I told him I seemed to keep losing Dave (KLR) in my rear view mirror. To be old that "yeah, I had that same problem on the ride up to meet you."

Okay, that's my fun poke at someone riding a KLR. There are many, many places where the KLR would be the much better choice (speaking as someone who dumped a Burgman on a gravel road, they do not handle well on somewhat lose light to moderately graveled dirt roads) but they are very good on the highway and handle winds well. Acceleration is smooth and you can cruise all day long 70-80 miles per hour and still have grunt in reserve. I've ridden one between Houston and Breckenridge as well as other long 1,000+ mile rides. Care does need to be taken on the throttle or you will find yourself going in the mid 90s without even realizing your going that fast. I'm speaking of 1 up. Nicest thing about the Burgman 400 was taking a 3-4 day trip and having everything fit under the seat. No saddle bags, top case or even a net (one of which is included with the Burgman 400 and it has connection knobs discretely tucked under the tail to attach it without using hooks that could damage paint.

Negatives for me was the seating position and low speed handling but I'm used to and prefer more upright seating. So we traded in the Burgman for a BV 500 which still isn't quite as good for distance riding as my Scarabeo 500, same engine just different suspension, seat and body panels but the differences in ride is enough to be noticeable. Check around some dealerships will let you rent a used one if they have one in stock. (I've seen a few that don't call it a rental but a conditional sale. You "buy" the bike and can return it within 10 days for a "restocking" fee.) That would give you the opportunity to see if it is one that fits you or not.They are a good scoot and if you don't go off road or do dirt/gravel roads then the Burgman would be better for touring than a KLR but that's just my opinion. I'm a road not off road rider so what do I know.

I disagree with CDWISE regarding low speed handling. I have a Burgman 650 and the center of gravity IS lower than a Vespa GT/GTS. Low speed handling is fantastic, and in some situations better than my Vespa.

If by low speed handling you mean moving it around in the garage, then yes, the Vespa is easier to push around. But if we're talking about low speed riding, the short wheelbase and smaller tires of the Vespa make it a *little* less steady at low speeds on it's own. The Burgman just seems to want to stay upright.

Having said that, I ALWAYS ride the Vespa on short hops and intermediate distances, because it's just plain more fun. The Vespa also does just fine for longer touring rides.

CD, I see you post this same thing about the Burgman often, and it surprises me. You are a real rider, and you have a wide experience with many types of scooters, but your description of the Burgman just doesn't make sense to me. I wonder...were you riding a 400 or a 650? Because the spring vs. unsprung weight makes a difference in handling. Anyone who has ridden a newer 650 will feel the balance and great low speed handling of the machine.

I can totally understand if the ergos didn't suit you, because that changes in function of an indidual's body type and riding position preference.